Jenn Post 3

Jenn Shea

A.

In terms of aesthetics, Riefenstahl’s work is visually pleasing. The use of angles is perhaps the most intriguing aspect of her film Triumph of the Will. Riefenstahl set cameras at very interesting and varying angles in order to capture the moving images from all different perspectives. Disregarding any motive she had for including specific angles in her film, they allow us for example to see an appalling differentiation between the mass of Hitler supporters and S.A. troops versus the power of Hitler singled out. These two very contrasting images, without reference to their goal or meaning to the film, are in general a very captivating technique for an audience.

The music Riefenstahl recorded over the images is also a very effective aspect of her art. Perhaps working toward the idea of art being about visual beauty and not about meaning as it is interpreted, the lack of audible conversation allows for the viewer to focus solely on the visible images Riefenstahl is capturing through the use of the aforementioned angles.

B.

I personally do not feel Riefenstahl ought to apologize for her art. Regardless of whether or not I believe she had prior motives or messages in making this film and in using the techniques described above, I feel that such messages can change and evolve in the creation of art. I do not believe that the message must be predetermined in order to create a piece of art, but rather the message or ideas within a work of art are processed and are subject to change and adjustment throughout the development of the painting, movie, song, etc. I also believe that the artist should never be blamed for a message that is solely perceived by a viewer. I believe that all art is subject through interpretation by the eye of the beholder, and that even when an artist does have some message in mind when creating the art, the viewer is still responsible for determining the significance or meaning of the work in the context of his or her own life and ideals.

Sontag clearly has a very critical and cynical view of Riefenstahl’s work and perhaps for good reason only if you rely on the intentions of the artist when determining the beauty of artwork. Sontag bases most of her claims concerning Riefenstahl’s work as propaganda on the fact that Riefenstahl had a close relationship with Hitler and thus created the film from a biased view. She states that because of this, the film cannot be seen as a representation of truth. I feel that although it is true that a biased eye will manipulate the way in which we see the truth, the individual is still accountable for using his or her own knowledge of the actual in order to determine the message, and that for this reason Riefenstahl’s film can still be appreciated for its artistic merits. Sontag also tries to discredit Riefenstahl when she states that, “Part of the impetus behind Riefenstahl’s recent promotion to the status of a cultural monument surely owes to the fact that she is a woman,” which implies that there is no other reason for which individuals would take interest in Riefenstahl’s films. This idea can also be seen in Devereaux’s “Beauty and Evil,” when she discusses how women only have influence in films and as filmmakers because men see them as erotic objects.

On pages 136-137 of “Beauty and Evil,” Devereaux discusses how we can no longer look at art in regard to “‘autonomous’ aesthetics” because we have developed political, gender, and racial contexts as we view art. She also mentions that women are not exempt from this political bias. Thus, Devereaux would also have held Riefenstahl accountable for the way in which she portrayed Nazi Germany. She states that “To question art’s autonomy and universality need not imply that artworks are without value-quite the contrary-but their value may differ from what we once supposed.” Clearly, Devereaux, although she does not make any direct references to any of Riefenstahl’s specific films or of her credibility as a filmmaker, does argue similarly to Sontag in that art today is analyzed on a deeper level than visual and surface appearance, and that a viewer is much more subject to being influenced by the motives of the artist.